EU ministers determined to advance pesticide law despite uncertainty

Most EU agriculture ministers have voiced their resolve to continue work on the EU’s contentious pesticide regulation, despite the European Parliament voting against the file and further negotiations on it.

The contentious sustainable use of pesticides regulation (SUR) proposal aims to slash the use and risk of pesticides in half by 2030, as set out in the EU’s flagship food policy, the Farm to Fork strategy.

During Monday’s (11 December) meeting in Brussels, ministers widely voiced support for pushing ahead and finding a workable compromise on the Commission’s proposal.

At the same time, many of them deplored the decision of the European Parliament, which in November not only rejected its own proposed negotiating position on the SUR, but also voted against going back to continue work on the file, effectively leaving the proposal at an impasse.

While not unprecedented, the move is exceedingly rare and immediately raised questions in the aftermath of the vote as to whether this means the file is dead in the water.

The two likely options now are either the intervention of the EU executive in withdrawing its own proposal or a decision by the EU ministers to continue working on the file regardless of the outcome of the European Parliament’s vote.

Ministers to continue work

With the Commission not yet taking decisive action, all eyes have been on the Council to see whether work will continue on the file – and that is exactly what EU agriculture ministers plan to do, according to Spanish agriculture minister Luis Planas.

“We have to continue to work,” Planas – who currently heads the AGRIFISH Council – told journalists at a press conference following a meeting of EU agriculture ministers on Monday.

“I remain [an] optimist, and I think if we can make progress before the European elections, excellent. If not, we will continue working because […] we have to confront the situation,” he added. 

However, during the meeting, Planas also admitted that, after the Parliament’s rejection, “the future of this file is rather uncertain at this stage.”

He added that he hopes the upcoming Belgian Council presidency, which will take over starting in January, will be able to make use of the work Spain has already done in brokering compromises. “But this all depends on the political context,” he added.

Unclear future

Since Monday’s agriculture ministers’ meeting was the last one under the Spanish presidency, it will fall to Belgium – the next country in line to take over the helm of the rotating EU Presidency – to finalise an agreement between member states.

However, it remains uncertain whether the SUR would be adopted even if member states do find an agreement, since both them and the European Parliament ultimately have to agree on a version of the text.

Since the Parliament did not adopt a position, the usual negotiations between the two lawmakers would be skipped, and the only way forward is for the Parliament to reject or amend the Council’s position by an absolute majority of lawmakers – a step that seems relatively unlikely after its outright rejection of the file at the last vote.

Meanwhile, many ministers made a point of lauding the Spanish presidency for how far it has come towards a compromise between member states.

“We applaud the efforts of the presidency to find workable compromises on the most difficult topics of the proposal,” said Danish minister Jacob Jensen, for instance, who added the Parliament’s reaction was “all the more reason for us in the Council to be responsible and constructive”.

Council discord remains

The “workable compromises” proposed by the Spanish presidency include changes to some of the aspects of the Commission’s original text that were most contentious among member states.

This includes the designation of binding national reduction targets, which Spain proposes to effectively scrap and only include the Union-wide target of a 50% reduction – a move that environmentalists see as severely weakening the regulation since individual countries could not be held to account.

The other major tweak proposed by Madrid concerns a change in the definition of so-called sensitive areas, in which pesticide use would be prohibited according to the Commission proposal.

For several countries, however, these sweeteners do not go far enough.

“We have to accept that there are still a number of issues that have not been resolved, particularly with regard to an assessment of the impact of this proposed regulation on the entire production system in Europe,” Italian minister Francesco Lollobrigida said.

And while France’s Marc Fesneau said “some improvements” have been made compared to the original text, he said ministers are not yet “seeing eye to eye”.

“We need to make sure we maintain our food production capacity,” he said.

[Edited by Nathalie Weatherald]

Read more with Euractiv